Conan the Barbarian - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Conan the Barbarian Reviews

Page 1 of 185
April 17, 2018
Despite the potential for action and adventure, this remake is not a patch on the old Arnie version from back in the 1980s. After a reasonable good opening 10-15 minutes dealing with how Conan becomes orphaned, the movie rapidly becomes a dull parade of cliche and senseless gore. Surely somebody can do better with this source material as the potential to tell a really exciting, intelligent and witty story is clearly there. Sadly, this version is pretty wide of the mark and barely passes as entertaining.
½ April 2, 2018
This is great fun, lots of flying body parts, brutal yet comedic action all over the place. The characters are cool, the casting is perfect, what's not to like.
½ February 3, 2018
Go on a journey with our eponymous hero as ventures from being a misogynistic prick to grudging new man. On the way to enlightenment, he encounters all sorts of scrapes, many of them highly imaginative. Summarily dispatched in full gory detail (the nose scene!), the stunt budget must have stretched wallets. Always very overblown, these things. The good guys smoulder, the bad guys glower, the bare-breasted women pout like there's no tomorrow. But it all adds up to very little. The film lurches choppily and the acting and dialogue is often cringe worthy. I actually preferred the scenes when Conan was a boy (the hot metal spilled on cheek scene is a good one). It doesn't help that the adult Conan looks like the front man of a rock band. Not even a thrash metal band, where he might have a shaved head and beard. Instead, he looks like one of those soft rock tossers a la Aerosmith or Poison. It's not even like he has to be good looking. He takes his women for the hell of it. Although, given his experience you think he'd be a better kisser. He looks like a pissed sixth former taking tops off beer
bottles with his teeth as he chews the face off the poor love interest. Some good scenes - the sand men were brilliant but about as durable as a geriatric aunt, for example - let down by poor direction leading to a tailing off of interest. Taken individually, some of the set pieces were great. But they mash up into a very unsatisfying whole.
½ January 8, 2018
Seeing for first time. Very unclear what's going on in the first five minutes. Ron Perlman's wife is about to give birth while their village is under attack...and then Ron Perlman and wife have time to do a bloody early c-section and then show her the baby and cradle it, since apparently all that other pillaging and murder just sat down a bit while that was happening.

Then uh....Ron Perlman too? Now? Again? I though he died giving birth to Conan, protecting Conan, but no now he's his uh, slave-master?

I'll keep watching just to have able to watch this movie once. Sat through Crash (the stupid one), etc. Only never finished yet is Solaris (Clooney one) since so utterly boring and pointless after the first 30-60 minutes.

This movie is ridiculous.

And even intro: magic mask empowered by virgins' blood that usurped Cimmeria or something but then got lost or something. Apparently this is important and will be important in this film for some reason. Still watching....still yawning....

And uh finished it I guess [not sure...just....that's not on now...]. Some action things.

I think the major reason I view this version sucking rather than the Milius version is of pace. Not just editing, but storytelling. And well thanks too Oliver Stone for writing that. And who wrote this shit version though? Or directed it with mind in idea of 700 edit jumps and 70,000,000 dollars on uh...well movies these days need CGI right?

And it didn't even follow any of the classic Robert E. Howard original books. Nor others such as Roy Thomas.

"I want to remake a former classic". "I will need 600 million dollars".
Super Reviewer
September 21, 2017
Not comparing this to the original still doesn't help it become a good film as it's poorly written and acted, The typical storyline for these fantasy films so it gets very predictable, There was a few good action scenes, Very bloody maybe abit too much blood in places, The effects were ok 90% of the time, I can't comment on the 3D as I watched the 2D version, I've got to give credit to Jason Momoa for taking up the role as it's not an easy one to fill and if i'm honest he doesn't compare to Arnold Schwarzenegger size wise but he did ok in other parts, Lets be honest there's not many who could fit the role, Maybe Dwayne Johnson but that is it, Anyway it's nothing great or memorable and we didn't ask for a remake but I suppose it's not that terrible.
½ May 13, 2017
The original 1982 version is one of my favorite epic fantasy adventures. While Arnold wasn't going to win any Oscars for his portrayal, he was born for the role. Some of the other roles, however, noteably James Earl Jones, Max Von Sydow, and Mako as the Wizard were tremendous standouts.

I still reguarly listen to the epic soundtrack by Basil Poledouris which is among the best soundtracks ever made.

This remake is a tepid, boring, and pale version of the original with an equally snooze-inducing soundtrack. There was no reason whatsoever to waste the film making this embarrasing remake.
February 28, 2017
Well as it is its closer to the original story witch the 80s flick lacked
Jason mamoa was a good Conan I think not just a dumb troll he does have a brain if you read the lore with a better director and writers it could have been a masterpiece many did not even give it a chance witch is probably why it flopped
February 24, 2017
Though enjoyably R-rated, this remake is missing the dark tone and heavy driving force of the original and has a few too many silly fantasy elements.
December 11, 2016
Really?? Again with the negative feedback for a movie?? Yes it's a remake and no Arnie is not in it... SO WHAT?!?!? As I recall both of Arnie's presentation of Conan, he was exactly the same or maybe even worst then Momoa's version, dialogue oriented that is. Arnie couldn't even speak good english for God's sake!!! So the people that said this movie is crap, then you are largely mistaken... In the first act alone, the movie compels you in the action of the story with Perlman and young Leo Howard. And that action resumes when Momoa takes the lead... cause isn't that what Conan is all about?? Action and gore?? It's sad that people would always bring up the negative aspects instead of stating the fact that this movie rocks!!!
Super Reviewer
November 20, 2016
There's some cathartically pleasant violence, particularly in the first half, but ultimately this movie didn't have to be made, and it *definitely* didn't have to be made under the name Conan.

Final rating:?? - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product.
½ September 18, 2016
If you like fantasy setting and violence then its a good film. If you are watching this for another reason then i don't understand you and you probably shouldn't be here.
½ August 20, 2016
The original is much,much better. A real shame
August 18, 2016
Jason Mamoa is scrumptious! I won't otherwise be paying attention...
August 1, 2016
It doesn't quite reach the level of mediocre. The action is better than the original, the special effects are better, and the directing is tighter. But the characters lack charisma and the plot is pointless and confused.

Even that would be acceptable in a Conan flick, but the ending is abysmal. I mean, really, really stupid. I'm not spoiling anything to say the final battle involves a powerful evil witch who can summon demons and uses poison, yet she decides to duke it out with her fists before meeting her end, without a whiff of magic. And the MacGuffin for the whole movie, the super-powerful evil mask that will make it's wearer "a god", does absolutely nothing. The main villain has to duel it out with swords, and eventually just falls off a bridge. He doesn't even get stabbed.

It feels like the scriptwriters woke up one morning, realized their script was overdue, and whipped off the last few pages on the bus ride into work.
June 8, 2016
Um dos piores filmes da década.
May 25, 2016
It was okay. It definitely doesn't have the 'adventure' feel the Arnold Conan had, but it was severable in its own right. Its just a 'meh' kind of action flick, that goes for shock and aw when it wants. Character are non-existent, story is i honestly can't tell you, action was okay. I say if its on TV give it a watch if ya got nothing else, it might keep you entertain, or just serve as white noise.
½ May 19, 2016
Arnold would be dissapointed.
½ April 21, 2016
What a giant turd ball of a film!!!!!
½ April 17, 2016
Some day there will be a GREAT Conan movie. This wasn't it. I did like Jason Momoa as Conan though -- he looked the part.
February 1, 2016
Another example showing how much Hollywood doesn't care anymore!
Page 1 of 185